The Official *England's Journey to Brazil 2014* Thread

[mystiroakey]

First topic message reminder :

Thats my Team GSC

I would be inclined to play Barkley instead of Ox if he isn't fit over sterling tbh. Both strong- both run at the opposition. Sterling does off course do this but isn't quite as physically imposing- all 3 have great feet but the former two are just stronger. Sterling is the better overall player though and perhaps would be the best option v costa rica and italy but against uruguay at the least I would rather have strength in the shape of ox or barkley.

I am surprised hearing many others saying wilshire had no impact. I thought it was his best game for yonks. Nothing spectacular but he played the way CM's should play- bright , alert, took the odd player on, was forward passing on the whole. Ok he got taken down a few too many times- but 70% of the time it results in retaining possession in a free kick.

[NickisBHAFC]

People who criticize sideways passing are pretty stupid tbh.

[NickisBHAFC]

Danny Welbeck really hasn't impressed me, would much rather see Lambert come off the bench than him tbh.

[Diggers]

Short passing and sideways passing are not the same thing. You wouldn't keep possession long by passing sideways, short passing is exchanging passed between the midfield and defence up down and across.
I suspect very few of Henderson's passes actually went sideways yesterday.

[sportform]

Jordan Henderson is about as good at passing as I am at sex

92 passes 91% pass completion rate. I think far too many people underestimate the role he has. He is not going to be a world beater but kept the ball moving, spread the play and allows the likes of Barkley and Wilshere to go forward. He gave the team balance and I thought England looked far more creative with Barkley and Wilshere either side of Henderson in the second half. I really don't think people understand tactics sometimes. You can't have too many cooks.

Exactly. I can keep my balls moving and do nothing impressive, constantly ruining the flow of anything if I try do something interesting and always finishing as someone unexciting who you wouldnt remember.

I dont mind Henderson, I just dont want him even considering passing to creatively. His final ball is generally poor.

His pass to Lallana was probably the best pass of the game. My point about Henderson is that he pivots England's attack. He doesn't have to be impressive or creative but just keep the ball moving. Every top team has that sort of player yet English football completely ignores is in favour of a 'hoof' ball.

The fact that Wilshere struggled against Ecuador in a midfield two but played better against Honduras, in a midfield three, when Henderson allowed him more freedom to go forward and affect the game proves why Henderson should start.

Take that anchor/ pivot out and it becomes harder to control the game.

[Diggers]

Carrick, Barry and Parker all play that short passing role. Even Lampard does now, how many caps between that lot? Hardly ignored. It's just that we don't tend to play systems that hang onto possession for as long.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

No, the English don't. My problem with Henderson is him using the ball forward. When he drifts further forward I think he often kills attacks and is cumbersome on the ball in advanced areas.

Of course I'd play him and Gerrard. Gerrard is positionally far better and his passing range is necessary in that team. He also passes the ball with far better tempo. Henderson is consistently offering himself for the ball and that shouldn't be underestimated. I'd have Wilshere over him if I could trust his discipline.

Owen, you know we have a weak defence and two full backs who are better going forward. You have to have some protection to get the est of those full backs. On top of that, I like a winger who will run at people. Sterling does that, yet he also understands his responsibility and the role. Sturridge doesn't have either. The best we've seen of Sturridge is in and around the box. The finishing hasn't been perfect, but I'm not too worried. Strikers miss chances

[Duty281]

Owen - Yes England do usually make fast starts in their opening game of the tournament, it then tails off after half-time of that first game, normally. In all those six games you posted, England scored first in all of them. England have also opened the scoring after three and four minutes in their last two opening World Cup games. I just hope England don't tail off after a fast start this time!

And I'll question what England games have you been watching if you think Milner will start on Saturday? Or why would you want to put a square peg in a round hole by playing Sturridge wide? He either plays ten or nine, or he doesn't play. You underestimate England, like many people, by such a large degree.

Sportform - Agreed on Henderson's pass to Lallana; it was the best of the game.

[sportform]

No, the English don't. My problem with Henderson is him using the ball forward. When he drifts further forward I think he often kills attacks and is cumbersome on the ball in advanced areas.

Of course I'd play him and Gerrard. Gerrard is positionally far better and his passing range is necessary in that team. He also passes the ball with far better tempo. Henderson is consistently offering himself for the ball and that shouldn't be underestimated. I'd have Wilshere over him if I could trust his discipline.

Owen, you know we have a weak defence and two full backs who are better going forward. You have to have some protection to get the est of those full backs. On top of that, I like a winger who will run at people. Sterling does that, yet he also understands his responsibility and the role. Sturridge doesn't have either. The best we've seen of Sturridge is in and around the box. The finishing hasn't been perfect, but I'm not too worried. Strikers miss chances

I don't see Henderson and Wilshere the same kind of player. I would forget Henderson as an attacking/ creative option. I just want him to stay in front of the two central defenders.and.play the simple passes. Wilshere is more like Gerrard, in my opinion, in that they want.to get the ball and make something happen. I don't like Gerrard in the holding role. I have seen it mention a few times at the 'quarterback' role and if anyone watches American Football they would know the key to winning is not turning the ball over. Gerrard in that role constantly looks to go long and play a 'Hollywood ball' and that screams losing possession.

[owen10ozzy]

And you overestimate them greatly! I get patriotism.. Fully behind it but yours is blind hope and faith.

What use is starting a game quick if you can't see it out?..I'll tell you...it isn't! Fact is England have shown nothing in these warm up games to suggest they are capable of breaking down anything approaching a world class defence...worst still they look like they will fall apart against the first decent strike force they come up against. Sloppy passes, poor decisions on the ball and in Glen Johnson a full back who is a calamity waiting to happen. All will be punished once we face someone half decent.

Hodgsons England is exactly what I'd expect and did expect of him...ordinary. Much like the football under him. May have only lost 3...but he's drawn 10...hardly stellar.

Square peg round hole is nonsense too. Welbeck isn't a great winger and for all the discipline he gives defensively he offers little out wide. He doesn't stay out there and put in decent balls and when he comes inside he clogs up the space even more what with Rooney and Sturridge both in it trying to get the ball off a two man deep lying midfield.

[sportform]

Short passing and sideways passing are not the same thing. You wouldn't keep possession long by passing sideways, short passing is exchanging passed between the midfield and defence up down and across.
I suspect very few of Henderson's passes actually went sideways yesterday.

What I like about Henderson yesterday, particularly in the second half, is that he was getting the ball from thwe left (from Barkley, Baines etc) and shifting it to the right (to Wilshere, Johnson) and that makes the opposition work. That is exactly what the likes of Spain, Barca, Bayern and the Netherlands do. Our main problem, as Glenn Hoddle stated was getting in behind defences. That is where we need to get Sterling and Oxlade- Chamberlaib involve. Walcott would have been the perfect person for that had he been fit as Gary Neville has highlighted a.few. imes on Sky in Arsenal games.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

No, the English don't. My problem with Henderson is him using the ball forward. When he drifts further forward I think he often kills attacks and is cumbersome on the ball in advanced areas.

Of course I'd play him and Gerrard. Gerrard is positionally far better and his passing range is necessary in that team. He also passes the ball with far better tempo. Henderson is consistently offering himself for the ball and that shouldn't be underestimated. I'd have Wilshere over him if I could trust his discipline.

Owen, you know we have a weak defence and two full backs who are better going forward. You have to have some protection to get the est of those full backs. On top of that, I like a winger who will run at people. Sterling does that, yet he also understands his responsibility and the role. Sturridge doesn't have either. The best we've seen of Sturridge is in and around the box. The finishing hasn't been perfect, but I'm not too worried. Strikers miss chances

I don't see Henderson and Wilshere the same kind of player. I would forget Henderson as an attacking/ creative option. I just want him to stay in front of the two central defenders.and.play the simple passes. Wilshere is more like Gerrard, in my opinion, in that they want.to get the ball and make something happen. I don't like Gerrard in the holding role. I have seen it mention a few times at the 'quarterback' role and if anyone watches American Football they would know the key to winning is not turning the ball over. Gerrard in that role constantly looks to go long and play a 'Hollywood ball' and that screams losing possession.

I tend to agree, I would only have Wilshere if he could get it into his head to play disciplined and simple. I have no problem with Henderson working as a cog alongside someone, turning the ball over and doing graft. I just dont like seeing him in the final third.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

Square peg round hole is nonsense too. Welbeck isn't a great winger and for all the discipline he gives defensively he offers little out wide. He doesn't stay out there and put in decent balls and when he comes inside he clogs up the space even more what with Rooney and Sturridge both in it trying to get the ball off a two man deep lying midfield.

So you want Sturridge out wide? Who will do what? Stay out on the left and whip in the crosses he is renowned for? And the latter point is a criticism of Sturridge not Welbeck.

[Duty281]

And you overestimate them greatly! I get patriotism.. Fully behind it but yours is blind hope and faith.

What use is starting a game quick if you can't see it out?..I'll tell you...it isn't! Fact is England have shown nothing in these warm up games to suggest they are capable of breaking down anything approaching a world class defence...worst still they look like they will fall apart against the first decent strike force they come up against. Sloppy passes, poor decisions on the ball and in Glen Johnson a full back who is a calamity waiting to happen. All will be punished once we face someone half decent.

Hodgsons England is exactly what I'd expect and did expect of him...ordinary. Much like the football under him. May have only lost 3...but he's drawn 10...hardly stellar.

Square peg round hole is nonsense too. Welbeck isn't a great winger and for all the discipline he gives defensively he offers little out wide. He doesn't stay out there and put in decent balls and when he comes inside he clogs up the space even more what with Rooney and Sturridge both in it trying to get the ball off a two man deep lying midfield.

It has nothing to do with patriotism, dear fellow, and I'm not quite sure as to how that enters into a football tournament anyway.

And would you really expect England, or any other team for that matter, to display that they have what it takes to break down a world-class defence in three low-key friendlies? No, you wouldn't. Are you cursing Italy as well, who couldn't even break down Luxembourg sufficently?

As for England's defence, I think it's decent but nothing more. It's certainly better than the defence England had four years ago, and it's also a defence with more pace centrally than four and two years ago. I don't think it is a walking disaster. Cahill and Jagielka are a good, not great partnership. Baines is also a good, not great, defender. Joe Hart is fantastic. Yes there's question marks over Johnson, but that's the only real concern in the defence and, indeed, in the whole team.

And Sturridge would be a square peg in a round hole, and playing him out wide in an unfamilar position would be detrimental to England's chances. Welbeck isn't a natural winger, true, but he is competent out there, and has played there for his club. I wouldn't pick Welbeck on Saturday, I'd go for Lallana and Sterling, but he certainly is not a bad option.

England aren't ordinary, they've merely done everything they needed to get to this point. In that time, they've evolved tactically, developed a superb mixture of youth and experience, and added a good level of cohesion and stability to the squad. The balance is perfect, the preparation is spot-on, and Roy Hodgson is ready to take his place in English sporting immortality alongside Alf Ramsey and Clive Woodward.

Football, at long, long last, is coming home. Back to where she belongs.

[Duty281]

And England have completed their journey to Brazil, which was the entire point of these two threads!

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Square peg round hole is nonsense too. Welbeck isn't a great winger and for all the discipline he gives defensively he offers little out wide. He doesn't stay out there and put in decent balls and when he comes inside he clogs up the space even more what with Rooney and Sturridge both in it trying to get the ball off a two man deep lying midfield.

So you want Sturridge out wide? Who will do what? Stay out on the left and whip in the crosses he is renowned for? And the latter point is a criticism of Sturridge not Welbeck.

Sturridge out wide is a bit of a #headsgone

[NickisBHAFC]

Tbf last night, when Sturridge was out wide he was effective. Took on his man, crossed the ball, used his pace well. What you want wide men to do.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

A complete waste of Sturridge and a complete misunderstanding of the strengths of this team.

[Duty281]

Unfortunately, the crosses were poor, Sturridge offers no defensive protection and it eradicates a prominent goal threat.

You either play Sturridge at nine, ten at a push, or not at all. Playing players out of position rarely goes well, for obvious reasons e.g. Gerrard on the left at the last World Cup, Scholes on the left at Euro 2004.

[NickisBHAFC]

Watching World Cup 2010. Whenever i see that Rob Green mistake i automatically throw something on the floor in an aggressive way, biggest plonker!

[LastDamnation]

I didn't think that starting lineup really worked - gerrard and henderson are both better in the holding role, and the pair together doesn't offer good enough transitions imo. I thought henderson looked much better alongside wilshere in the second half when his role was to sit, other than one good ball to lallana he didn't offer good enough. I'd much rather have henderson playing than gerrard in the holding role (although this won't happen), rather than playing them together. I think when wilshere and barkley came on there was much better link up play through midfield.

I'd ideally like to see a 4-3-3, henderson sitting with barkley wilshere ahead, sterling right and rooney/lallana left

[Dolphin Ziggler]

To be honest, the pair will be more necessary against better teams so really its harder to see how they work against Honduras and the like.

[Hammersmith harrier]

Owen - Yes England do usually make fast starts in their opening game of the tournament, it then tails off after half-time of that first game, normally. In all those six games you posted, England scored first in all of them. England have also opened the scoring after three and four minutes in their last two opening World Cup games. I just hope England don't tail off after a fast start this time!

And I'll question what England games have you been watching if you think Milner will start on Saturday? Or why would you want to put a square peg in a round hole by playing Sturridge wide? He either plays ten or nine, or he doesn't play. You underestimate England, like many people, by such a large degree.

Sportform - Agreed on Henderson's pass to Lallana; it was the best of the game.

Perfectly summing up the folly of basing an opinion on statistics, we started very well against France in both games and against Portugal, all three games we should have won comfortably, while against Sweden and USA we were fairly woeful.

[Liam]

After watching last night, I think England should play 4-3-3:

Hart

Johnson Cahill Jags Baines

Gerrard
Henderson Wilshere

Sturridge Rooney Sterling

[Hammersmith harrier]

Square peg round hole is nonsense too. Welbeck isn't a great winger and for all the discipline he gives defensively he offers little out wide. He doesn't stay out there and put in decent balls and when he comes inside he clogs up the space even more what with Rooney and Sturridge both in it trying to get the ball off a two man deep lying midfield.

So you want Sturridge out wide? Who will do what? Stay out on the left and whip in the crosses he is renowned for? And the latter point is a criticism of Sturridge not Welbeck.

Sturridge out wide is a bit of a #headsgone

The whole point of Welbeck playing out wide is his defensive discipline and the threat his pace offers on the break, neither of which Sturridge is capable of, do wonder what game people watch some times.

Personally against Italy i'd stick Welbeck on Pirlo, he did a job on Alonso a season ago, you stop the supply to and from Pirlo and you stop Italy.

[LastDamnation]

To be honest, the pair will be more necessary against better teams so really its harder to see how they work against Honduras and the like.

The full backs are not good enough defensively to justify such a negative style

[Ent]

Yeah if welbeck is in the team on te left it's to play a specific role.

People need to consider that when rating his performances.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

To be honest, the pair will be more necessary against better teams so really its harder to see how they work against Honduras and the like.

The full backs are not good enough defensively to justify such a negative style

I agree on one and completely disagree on the other. You have to have protection and cover in the midfield so that the full backs can play more offensively. If you have discipline from Henderson and Gerrard then you can have disciplined cover as Johnson and Baines go forward.

[NickisBHAFC]

This chat is done, Journey to Brazil has been mission accomplished. 

Latest England discussions can be discussed in the World Cup Section

Well done to Duty for making this a brilliant thread!

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Gerrard off injured in training with that groin strain

Henderson/Wilshere starting in CM?

[Guest]

Blessing in disguise possibly. We'll have more energy & movement but from set-pieces, which in a tight game could be important, we will be worse off without Gerrard's delivery.

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Blessing in disguise possibly. We'll have more energy & movement but from set-pieces, which in a tight game could be important, we will be worse off without Gerrard's delivery.

Tbf with Baines we don't have that much of a drop off with set pieces

[Duty281]

Gerrard, it appears, shall be fine for Saturday.

A relief because, if you hadn't noticed, his likely replacement would likely be Frank Lampard, given the situation with the captaincy - something which I'd be very keen to avoid.

[skyeman]

I thought NickisBHAFC had closed this thread. So he is not a mod?

[Crimey]

The problem with Henderson and Gerrard in the England team is they're both essentially being asked to do the same role, both of which isn't their best. I think Gerrard needs to sit deeper, allow him to play in a similar role to that which he has done all season and excelled in, that way he has a lot more space in front of him to start counter attacks. By playing him further up you restrict his time and space and make him run more. He should literally be playing where Pirlo is.

I would also allow Henderson more freedom to run beyond the last man, he does have pace but he's being held back to cover Gerrard when Gerrard should be deeper so there is less space behind him and allow Henderson to run forward, crucially filling in the space created by Sturridge and Rooney dropping off, then you have your wingers running in as well and defenders will struggle to pick people off.

I think the problem is that right now England's strength is pacey attacking players and Hodgson has a structured mindset where his players fulfil a certain role and that is it. A more expansive coach could get better use out of what is actually a very talented pool of players, not sure there is an English one available, but in principle that is the problem.

Think people are being too negative towards this World Cup, don't think England are as weak as people say.

[skyeman]

For me England have as much a realistic chance as any of the top 12. Just a case of 48 years of pain.

Better now not to expect but to hope.

[Hammersmith harrier]

The problem with Henderson and Gerrard in the England team is they're both essentially being asked to do the same role, both of which isn't their best. I think Gerrard needs to sit deeper, allow him to play in a similar role to that which he has done all season and excelled in, that way he has a lot more space in front of him to start counter attacks. By playing him further up you restrict his time and space and make him run more. He should literally be playing where Pirlo is.

I would also allow Henderson more freedom to run beyond the last man, he does have pace but he's being held back to cover Gerrard when Gerrard should be deeper so there is less space behind him and allow Henderson to run forward, crucially filling in the space created by Sturridge and Rooney dropping off, then you have your wingers running in as well and defenders will struggle to pick people off.

I think the problem is that right now England's strength is pacey attacking players and Hodgson has a structured mindset where his players fulfil a certain role and that is it. A more expansive coach could get better use out of what is actually a very talented pool of players, not sure there is an English one available, but in principle that is the problem.

Think people are being too negative towards this World Cup, don't think England are as weak as people say.

I might get slated for this but ol' Harry might use the attacking talent at the disposal of the English manager better than most, one thing he's always been good at is setting teams up to attack and attack quickly.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

I thought NickisBHAFC had closed this thread. So he is not a mod?

mug*

[Dolphin Ziggler]

Oh god, the Arry principle has started again.

Its a theory I'm working on. If you mention Roy Hodgson so many times someone has to say Arry would make England better to watch. On the basis of nothing.

[mystiroakey]

I always wanted Arry.( but I would have been wrong overall)

Roy was brought youth..

There would have been a lot of posts and tweets etc about him only including lamps due to being his uncle... Which off course has been kind of proved to being nonsense in the hypothetical scenario because Roy picked him anyway.

There would have also been a way bigger media expectation and media storm. It's very low key due to Roy which is nice for once. Well the last one was as well and we didn't lose a game in 90 or 120.

The lads would have been under more pressure, which isn't needed..

[Hammersmith harrier]

Oh god, the Arry principle has started again.

Its a theory I'm working on. If you mention Roy Hodgson so many times someone has to say Arry would make England better to watch. On the basis of nothing.

I don't think we'd achieve better results under Arry but I do think we'd possibly play a more expansive game that would leave us vulnerable at the back, not sure Hodgson is going to do any better than Arry could have done.

[mystiroakey]

Arry is a top manager IMO. But I prefer the low key approach Roy goes about his job. He is no Stuart Lancaster in regards to moving this England team forward in a low key way. But it's much harder to do that as a international footy manager. But he is just an unassuming chilled manager that will cause no storms and has also seemed to get our lads fighting very hard for places and is getting good productivity out of what we have. Which I am also sure arry would have got, but I can't say the same for any other manager since Terry V.

[Hammersmith harrier]

Lancaster is a boss though and has moulded a group of world class players into a world class team, he does benefit from having some genuinely world class players. Hodgson doesn't the equivalent to a Cole, to a Launchbury/Lawes partnership, a Brown or a Tuilagi shaped battering ram. The Rugby team show how it should be done, an improved infrastructure and more money being pumped into all levels of the game have eventually paid dividends.

[Dolphin Ziggler]

As well as being Take That's financial advisor, he just isnt that good a manager. His philosophy is also based far more around experienced heads.

He isnt even a particularly attacking manager. His success at Tottenham was built on Defoe or Van Der Vaart working off of Crouchy.

[Duty281]

We wouldn't have made it to Brazil under 'Arry, you know.

Good old Roy knows what it's all about!

[skyeman]

I thought NickisBHAFC had closed this thread. So he is not a mod?

mug*

Aye  

[Good Golly I'm Olly]

Arry for England? Again? Really? REALLY?

Cmon folks

[Duty281]

Roy has done everything right - apart from those sunglasses that he's wearing...just what is he thinking with those?

[skyeman]

Roy has done everything right - apart from those sunglasses that he's wearing...just what is he thinking with those?

And that tracksuit. Gees.

[Duty281]

According to Roy Hodgson, Gerrard and Parker were both carrying injuries into the game against Italy at Euro 2012.

Oh well, that's all over now - as for Saturday, Roy says England will attack and give Italy something to think about.

Positive talk for a positive result!

[Stella]

I do hope we do attack. That's all I ask for.

[Sponsored content]